Search for: "Missouri v. Iowa" Results 101 - 120 of 382
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Aug 2019, 3:00 am by Jim Sedor
National/Federal Campaigns Say They’ll Match Political Contributions. [read post]
6 Aug 2019, 5:45 am by Kevin Kaufman
For instance, Maryland permits local governments to provide a credit for expanding manufacturing facilities.[6] Similarly, Idaho allows counties to exempt TPP that is part of an investment of at least $500,000 in a new manufacturing plant for up to five years.[7] Seven states (Delaware, Hawaii,  Illinois, Iowa, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania)  exempt all TPP from taxation, while another five states (Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota,  and South Dakota)… [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 8:31 am by Thaddeus Hoffmeister
  The Iowa Supreme Court recently examined the test from Duren in State v. [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 4:36 pm by David Kopel
Five states required parental consent for handgun transfers to minors (Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Texas). [read post]
23 Feb 2019, 12:35 pm by admin
The Relevance and Admissibility of Rezoning and Comparable Sales Occurring After the Date of Taking, When Determining the Value of Condemned Property by Alan T. [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 6:59 am by Kate Fort
Illinois had three (finally) though reported none of them, and Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, New Jersey, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Washington all had two (only Missouri, Oklahoma, and South Dakota reported their cases). [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 6:59 am by ilpc
Illinois had three (finally) though reported none of them, and Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, New Jersey, Oklahoma, South Dakota and Washington all had two (only Missouri, Oklahoma, and South Dakota reported their cases). [read post]
30 Oct 2018, 9:58 am by Kevin Kaufman
The Task Force has already seen results, facilitating voluntary local reforms, and it takes on even greater importance in the wake of the Wayfair v. [read post]
13 Sep 2018, 10:00 pm by Jim Sedor
She has said she would not vote to confirm a nominee who was hostile to Roe v. [read post]